Re: [PATCH 1/1] suspend: delete sys_sync()

Path	csiph.com!aioe.org!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod
From	Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
Newsgroups	linux.kernel
Subject	Re: [PATCH 1/1] suspend: delete sys_sync()
Date	Sun, 05 Jul 2015 11:10:03 +0200
Message-ID	<pIO5Z-W8-23@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	<pIjES-70S-9@gated-at.bofh.it>
X-Original-To	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
X-X-Sender	stern@netrider.rowland.org
MIME-Version	1.0
Content-Type	TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender	robomod@news.nic.it
List-ID	<linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Approved	robomod@news.nic.it
Lines	41
Organization	linux.* mail to news gateway
X-Original-Cc	Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>, Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@hmh.eng.br>, One Thousand Gnomes <gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>, Linux PM list <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>, "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>
X-Original-Date	Sat, 4 Jul 2015 10:19:55 -0400 (EDT)
X-Original-Message-ID	<Pine.LNX.4.44L0.1507041011510.19175-100000@netrider.rowland.org>
X-Original-References	<1496051.AgsebokWnB@vostro.rjw.lan>
X-Original-Sender	linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Xref	aioe.org linux.kernel:1176916

Show key headers only | View raw

On Sat, 4 Jul 2015, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:

> The only argument against dropping sys_sync() from the suspend code path
> I've seen in this thread that I entirely agree with is that it may lead to
> regressions, because we've done it practically forever and it may hide latent
> bugs somewhere in block drivers etc.  Dropping it, though, is the only way
> to see those bugs, if any, and if we want to ever fix them, we need to see
> them.  That's why I think that it may be a good idea to allow people to
> drop it if they are willing to accept some extra risk (via the kernel
> command line, for example).

I'd be perfectly happy to have the sync selectable at runtime, one way 
or another.  The three most reasonable options seem to be:

	kernel command line

	sysfs file

	sysctl setting

The command line is less flexible (it can't be changed after booting).  
Either of the other two would be fine with me.

> Moreover, question is if we really need to carry out the sync on *every*
> suspend even if it is not pointless overall.  That shouldn't really be
> necessary if we suspend and resume often enough or if we resume only for
> a while and then suspend again.  Maybe it should be rate limited somehow
> at least?

For example, skip the sync if the system has been awake for < 100 ms?  
The cutoff time could also be controlled by the sysfs file: -1 =>
never sync, 0 => always sync, > 0 => sync if the system has been awake 
longer than the value.

Alan Stern

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Thread

Re: [PATCH 1/1] suspend: delete sys_sync() Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com> - 2015-07-03 03:50 +0200
  Re: [PATCH 1/1] suspend: delete sys_sync() "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net> - 2015-07-04 02:40 +0200
    Re: [PATCH 1/1] suspend: delete sys_sync() Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu> - 2015-07-05 11:10 +0200
      Re: [PATCH 1/1] suspend: delete sys_sync() Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> - 2015-07-07 12:30 +0200

csiph-web